State v. Scott

THIS
OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS
PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

Michael
Tondeleo Scott, Appellant.

Appeal From Richland County

 William P. Keesley, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-243

Submitted May 1, 2009 – Filed May 28, 2009   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Appellate Defender Elizabeth A. Franklin-Best, of Columbia, for
Appellant.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney
General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott,
of Columbia; and Solicitor Warren B. Giese, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Michael
Tondeleo Scott appeals from his guilty
plea to criminal domestic violence, unlawful use of a telephone, and resisting
arrest.  On appeal, Scott argues the plea judge abused his discretion by
imposing a probationary sentence instead of a monetary fine.  After a thorough review of the record and counsel's
brief, pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) and State
v. Williams, 305 S.C. 116, 406 S.E.2d 357 (1991), we dismiss the appeal and
grant counsel's motion to be relieved.[1]

APPEAL
DISMISSED.

HEARN, C.J., THOMAS, and KONDUROS, JJ.,
concur.

[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant
to Rule 215, SCACR.